Talk:Ethel G. Hofman

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Trivia[edit]

I removed this paragraph:

Her newspaper columns (besides covering the food aspects of the annual Jewish calendar) featured recipes written, or adapted, for the kosher kitchen from around the world, including the Pacific Northwest,[1] Paris,[2] Jerusalem,[3] Tunisia,[4] London,[5] Scotland[6] and the United States.[7] They recognized the worldwide economic downturn of the early 21st Century,[8] as well as trends in the kosher food industry.[9]

Which included numerous citations, of the same type:

  1. ^ Ethel Hofman, “We’re Cooking: A new culinary frontier: the Pacific Northwest,” Chicago Jewish Star, August 9, 1991, p. 19.
  2. ^ Ethel G. Hofman, “A Taste of The Marais,” Baltimore Jewish Times, June 20, 2008, pp. 56-57.
  3. ^ Ethel G. Hofman, “King David Breakfast,” Baltimore Jewish Times, November 7, 2008, pp. 58-59.
  4. ^ Ethel Hofman, "Fragrant Rosh Hashanah Straight From Tunisia," Jewish Exponent, September 14, 2011.
  5. ^ Ethel G. Hofman, “The Jewish Kitchen: In Golders Green, everybody loves Saturday night,” MetroWest Jewish News, November 13, 1997, p. 62.
  6. ^ Cite error: The named reference oatmeal was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  7. ^ Ethel G. Hofman, “Beyond Nibbles and Noshes: Saluting the USA – a patriotic feast,” Washington Jewish Week, October 28, 2004, p. 34.
  8. ^ Ethel G. Hofman, “Cooking for Tight Times,” Jewish Exponent, July 10, 2008, pp. 33-35.
  9. ^ Ethel G. Hofman, “Kosherfest: An abundance of goodies from the world over,” Jewish Exponent, December 4, 2008, p. 42.

I removed the paragraph because Wikipedia is an encyclopedia; per WP:NOT, it's not an indiscriminate collection of information. It's an overview, and it's a reflection of what reliable, published sources think is important.

Moreover, when a Wikipedia editor combines a bunch of snippets of information (as above) and then summarizes them (as above), this is not acceptable - it's original writing. Such a summary must come from a reliable source to be acceptable.

Finally, this type of citation vastly overstates the importance of a topic. For example, the publisher of most small newspapers normally write a column or more per week; most small newspapers have writers whose byline appears at least once per week. Following the logic above, then, one could create a Wikipedia article for such an (otherwise non-notable) person that would have hundreds of citations - very impressive, and very wrong. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 03:34, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]